You are right Texx....Bush is "THE DECIDER"...hell if elections started tommorrow..he could fill both houses of Congress with his lackies...so great are his coattails.. O.k...well the truth is that even the Bible Belt elections where the masses will vote for any Republican as long as they aren't personally performing abortions are up for grabs...but isn't it pretty to think so....
Confident? Absolutely Resilient? Completely Wrong? When compared to your way of thinking? BWAAAAHAHAHAHA This from a guy who takes more than a month to attempt to answer my rebuttal of his wrongheaded "analysis?" That is rich. You don't want to get into mathematics with me. I can out-math you any day of the week and several dozen times on Sunday. You provided average (or mean, explained below) weekly salary figures, which had risen over the time period you chose, while I provided the median family income for the same period. Median The median is the middle of a distribution: half the scores are above the median and half are below the median. The median is less sensitive to extreme scores than the mean and this makes it a better measure than the mean for highly skewed distributions. The median income is usually more informative than the mean income, for example. http://davidmlane.com/hyperstat/A27533.html Arithmetic Mean The arithmetic mean is what is commonly called the average: When the word "mean" is used without a modifier, it can be assumed that it refers to the arithmetic mean. The mean is the sum of all the scores divided by the number of scores. The formula in summation notation is: μ = ΣX/N where μ is the population mean and N is the number of scores. If the scores are from a sample, then the symbol M refers to the mean and N refers to the sample size. The formula for M is the same as the formula for μ. The mean is a good measure of central tendency for roughly symmetric distributions but can be misleading in skewed distributions since it can be greatly influenced by extreme scores. http://davidmlane.com/hyperstat/A15885.html As you can see by the definitions, median scores are far more reliable for determining overall distributions when the data is not normally distributed (shaped like a bell curve). Since, in the same post where I provided the median income figures, I also showed data indicating that the top .1% of Americans had seen an increase in salary of over 450%, we would want to use the median rather than the mean. Actually, your numbers help me to prove my point. The wages of the richest among us are rising so fast that they are keeping the mean weekly income numbers high while the median income keeps dropping, indicating that more and more Americans are losing ground when it comes to wages. Not even a good college try, rook. Apparently, you need some statistics classes in addition to your reading comprehension instruction.
Good call. When you've been outplayed, quickly try to change the topic and address something that you can google "really fast". Andy - please normalize your analysis for retirees, immigrants and other entrances/exits to the job market. I've already asked you to do that and you've dodged the question (not surprising).
Show me how those numbers would in any way differ from the numbers seen before Bush's presidency. These same statistics have been kept for decades and there have only been two periods in which the median family income has dropped. At no point in our history has median income dropped while weekly wages have remained the same or risen. Why do I have to "normalize" anything when we are comparing the same exact statistics that have been recorded for fifty years? I am talking about apples and you are trying to talk about plankton. Not surprising. If you can't win an argument, change the subject, huh?
No, I'm using an opinion poll as proof of public opinion. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Inequal In`e´qual a. 1. Unequal; uneven; various. By this definition, two thirds of all americans are liberals for not being jacked about GDP data. Is that what you're saying? Yes or no.
Andy, you're all over the map, my friend. You've repeatedly asked me to normalize unemployment numbers for all those secretive people who have dropped out of the job market, yet you can't normalize these numbers to provide a more detailed look? Andy, unemployment numbers have been kept for decades, also. Hrmph. Andy, put those world-class math skills of yours to work on this problem. Showcase your resiliency!
This is great. Thanks to this thread I've taken texxx off my ignore list. This **** is too funny to pass up. For an "economics grad from rice" you're sure looking the fool.
Whatever. You could have majored in underwater basket weaving for all the intellectual ability you've shown in this forum.
Rolling Stone is one of the worst magazines in print. I remember when it used to be about music and movies. Now it's the most blatant left-wing propaganda piece of crap out there.
Andrew Moon. Agreed. I love taking on 10-12 liberals and sending them home crying. What a way to close out a tough day of work.
Son you're too young to even know what RS is about. I love it! Whenever texxx is getting his ass handed to him in a thread he tries to change the subject and fall back on his economic "knowledge."
Hang in there basso! We're pulling for ya! Anyway, back to the thread. This graf from the FOX article is very telling...
